[gitfan86]

The trick is to get good at identifying the people that are correct and ignoring the people that don't know what they are saying.

It is hard, but once you can do that it is superior to listening to the experts only. The problem with people who are recognized as experts is that they have a high likelihood of wanting status and power. So while they may be experienced and smart their intentions may not be pure.

[wolverine876]

> The trick is to get good at identifying the people that are correct and ignoring the people that don't know what they are saying.

You need expertise yourself in order to do that. Otherwise you are easily misled.

> The problem with people who are recognized as experts is that they have a high likelihood of wanting status and power. So while they may be experienced and smart their intentions may not be pure.

Where do you get any information then? How do you get through your day?

People can have various motives and still provide accurate information. The motives don't completely dominate them, they have other motives, and we can read critically.

But if they lack expertise, they can't provide accurate information.

[kibwen]

> The problem with people who are recognized as experts is that they have a high likelihood of wanting status and power.

In order for this to have any useful predictive power, you have to also demonstrate that "the people who are correct" don't want status and power, and also that the set of people who are correct doesn't overlap with the set of experts.